Global Catalogs

I have a confusuon about global catalogs. If i take an example that we have
a forest that contains two domains for e.g. microsoft.com and msn.com and
both domains are having sub-domains like sales.microsoft.com and tech.msn.com
respectively. In this case all the domains in the forest will be having
global catalog of it's own and the partial copy of rest of the domains in the
forest or only the parent domain that means the first domain in the forest
will be having the copy of global catalogs. Kindly clarify this. Thanks in
advance

Advertisements

are you related to harsh singh or prajeep sing or manikander singh or,
nevermind

"Karandeep Singh" <Karandeep > wrote in
message news:...
> Hello All,
>
> I have a confusuon about global catalogs. If i take an example that we
> have
> a forest that contains two domains for e.g. microsoft.com and msn.com and
> both domains are having sub-domains like sales.microsoft.com and
> tech.msn.com
> respectively. In this case all the domains in the forest will be having
> global catalog of it's own and the partial copy of rest of the domains in
> the
> forest or only the parent domain that means the first domain in the forest
> will be having the copy of global catalogs. Kindly clarify this. Thanks in
> advance
>
> Kind Regards,
> Karandeep Singh.

Advertisements

"Karandeep Singh" <Karandeep > wrote in
message news:...
> Hello All,
>
> I have a confusuon about global catalogs. If i take an example that we
> have
> a forest that contains two domains for e.g. microsoft.com and msn.com and
> both domains are having sub-domains like sales.microsoft.com and
> tech.msn.com
> respectively. In this case all the domains in the forest will be having
> global catalog of it's own and the partial copy of rest of the domains in
> the
> forest or only the parent domain that means the first domain in the forest
> will be having the copy of global catalogs. Kindly clarify this. Thanks in
> advance
>
> Kind Regards,
> Karandeep Singh.

"The global catalog is the central repository of information about objects
in a tree or forest. By default, a global catalog is created automatically
on the initial domain controller in the first domain in the forest. A domain
controller that holds a copy of the global catalog is called a global
catalog server. You can designate any domain controller in the forest as a
global catalog server. Active Directory uses multimaster replication to
replicate the global catalog information between global catalog servers in
other domains. It stores a full replica of all object attributes in the
directory for its host domain and a partial replica of all object attributes
contained in the directory for every domain in the forest. The partial
replica stores attributes most frequently used in search operations (such as
a user's first and last names, logon name, and so on)."

So, in other words, a global catalog server in tech.msn.com has a full
replica of all objects in tech.msn.com, and a partial replica of all objects
in all other domains in the forest. A global catalog server in the msn.com
domain has a full replica of all objects in the msn.com domain, and a
partial replica of all objects in all other domains in the forest.

To put it a little simpler, the information that gets replicated to all of
the global catalog servers in a forest is a partial replica of all items in
the forest. A global catalog server adds to that a full replica of all
items in it's own domain, and that is the global catalog that is available
to it's domain.

--
Mitch Garvis, MCT
MCSA, MCITP, MCDST, MCTS
Microsoft MVP: Windows Server - Customer Experience
Visit my blog at http://blog.mitchgarvis.com
"John R" <jsr^^^813@zoom^^^internet.net> wrote in message
news:...
>
> "Karandeep Singh" <Karandeep > wrote in
> message news:...
>> Hello All,
>>
>> I have a confusuon about global catalogs. If i take an example that we
>> have
>> a forest that contains two domains for e.g. microsoft.com and msn.com and
>> both domains are having sub-domains like sales.microsoft.com and
>> tech.msn.com
>> respectively. In this case all the domains in the forest will be having
>> global catalog of it's own and the partial copy of rest of the domains in
>> the
>> forest or only the parent domain that means the first domain in the
>> forest
>> will be having the copy of global catalogs. Kindly clarify this. Thanks
>> in
>> advance
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>> Karandeep Singh.
>
> "The global catalog is the central repository of information about objects
> in a tree or forest. By default, a global catalog is created automatically
> on the initial domain controller in the first domain in the forest. A
> domain controller that holds a copy of the global catalog is called a
> global catalog server. You can designate any domain controller in the
> forest as a global catalog server. Active Directory uses multimaster
> replication to replicate the global catalog information between global
> catalog servers in other domains. It stores a full replica of all object
> attributes in the directory for its host domain and a partial replica of
> all object attributes contained in the directory for every domain in the
> forest. The partial replica stores attributes most frequently used in
> search operations (such as a user's first and last names, logon name, and
> so on)."
>
> So, in other words, a global catalog server in tech.msn.com has a full
> replica of all objects in tech.msn.com, and a partial replica of all
> objects in all other domains in the forest. A global catalog server in
> the msn.com domain has a full replica of all objects in the msn.com
> domain, and a partial replica of all objects in all other domains in the
> forest.
>
> To put it a little simpler, the information that gets replicated to all of
> the global catalog servers in a forest is a partial replica of all items
> in the forest. A global catalog server adds to that a full replica of all
> items in it's own domain, and that is the global catalog that is available
> to it's domain.
>
> John R
>

"Montreal MCT" <> wrote in message
news:...
> It was not mean, it was just either juvenile or ignorant.
>
> My understanding is that Sikhs are baptized, and when they do they (the
> males) are given the name Singh to add to their name; women are given a
> different name that escapes me now.
>
> To make fun of someone's religious traditions is just stupid and is not
> becoming.
>
> --
> Mitch Garvis, MCT
> MCSA, MCITP, MCDST, MCTS
> Microsoft MVP: Windows Server - Customer Experience
> Visit my blog at http://blog.mitchgarvis.com

Women are given the name Kaur. I think it means "princess", but I'm not a
Sikh so I'm not 100% sure. Karandeep will correct me if I'm wrong, I'm
sure.

--
Mitch Garvis, MCT
MCSA, MCITP, MCDST, MCTS
Microsoft MVP: Windows Server - Customer Experience
Visit my blog at http://blog.mitchgarvis.com
"TheITGirl" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
> "Montreal MCT" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> It was not mean, it was just either juvenile or ignorant.
>>
>> My understanding is that Sikhs are baptized, and when they do they (the
>> males) are given the name Singh to add to their name; women are given a
>> different name that escapes me now.
>>
>> To make fun of someone's religious traditions is just stupid and is not
>> becoming.
>>
>> --
>> Mitch Garvis, MCT
>> MCSA, MCITP, MCDST, MCTS
>> Microsoft MVP: Windows Server - Customer Experience
>> Visit my blog at http://blog.mitchgarvis.com
>
> Women are given the name Kaur. I think it means "princess", but I'm not a
> Sikh so I'm not 100% sure. Karandeep will correct me if I'm wrong, I'm
> sure.
>
> IT Girl MCDST
>

if you read correctly, which you didn't, probably because you are canadian,
my post clearly states singh, a common indian last name. no where in my post
did i make fun of his religious beliefs, that would be silly, as there is no
god.

"Montreal MCT" <> wrote in message
news:...
> It was not mean, it was just either juvenile or ignorant.
>
> My understanding is that Sikhs are baptized, and when they do they (the
> males) are given the name Singh to add to their name; women are given a
> different name that escapes me now.
>
> To make fun of someone's religious traditions is just stupid and is not
> becoming.
>
> --
> Mitch Garvis, MCT
> MCSA, MCITP, MCDST, MCTS
> Microsoft MVP: Windows Server - Customer Experience
> Visit my blog at http://blog.mitchgarvis.com
> "Cerebrus" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> On Aug 1, 2:25 am, "Consultant" <> wrote:
>>> are you related to harsh singh or prajeep sing or manikander singh or,
>>> nevermind
>>
>> That was just MEAN !
>>
>> nevermind ! ;-)
>>
>

I'm Canadian? What gave it away, eh? I'm always oot and aboot and nobody
never says nothing, eh! Now pass the Moosehead and maple syrup and bring
the sled dogs around so we can go to the hockey game, eh!

--
Mitch Garvis, MCT
MCSA, MCITP, MCDST, MCTS
Microsoft MVP: Windows Server - Customer Experience
Visit my blog at http://blog.mitchgarvis.com
"Consultant" <> wrote in message
news:...
> if you read correctly, which you didn't, probably because you are
> canadian, my post clearly states singh, a common indian last name. no
> where in my post did i make fun of his religious beliefs, that would be
> silly, as there is no god.
>
> "Montreal MCT" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> It was not mean, it was just either juvenile or ignorant.
>>
>> My understanding is that Sikhs are baptized, and when they do they (the
>> males) are given the name Singh to add to their name; women are given a
>> different name that escapes me now.
>>
>> To make fun of someone's religious traditions is just stupid and is not
>> becoming.
>>
>> --
>> Mitch Garvis, MCT
>> MCSA, MCITP, MCDST, MCTS
>> Microsoft MVP: Windows Server - Customer Experience
>> Visit my blog at http://blog.mitchgarvis.com
>> "Cerebrus" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> On Aug 1, 2:25 am, "Consultant" <> wrote:
>>>> are you related to harsh singh or prajeep sing or manikander singh or,
>>>> nevermind
>>>
>>> That was just MEAN !
>>>
>>> nevermind ! ;-)
>>>
>>
>
>

"Montreal MCT" <> wrote in message
news...
> I'm Canadian? What gave it away, eh? I'm always oot and aboot and nobody
> never says nothing, eh! Now pass the Moosehead and maple syrup and bring
> the sled dogs around so we can go to the hockey game, eh!

"Frisbee®" <> prattled ceaselessly in
news::
> "Montreal MCT" <> wrote in message
> news...
>> I'm Canadian? What gave it away, eh? I'm always oot and aboot and
>> nobody never says nothing, eh! Now pass the Moosehead and maple
>> syrup and bring the sled dogs around so we can go to the hockey game,
>> eh!
>
> Take off, eh? You're such a HOSE HEAD!
>

"catwalker63" <> wrote in message
news:Xns99804F0003F92catwalker63athotmail@216.196.97.136...
> "Frisbee®" <> prattled ceaselessly in
> news::
>
>> "Montreal MCT" <> wrote in message
>> news...
>>> I'm Canadian? What gave it away, eh? I'm always oot and aboot and
>>> nobody never says nothing, eh! Now pass the Moosehead and maple
>>> syrup and bring the sled dogs around so we can go to the hockey game,
>>> eh!
>>
>> Take off, eh? You're such a HOSE HEAD!
>
> Do you remember where we parked?

Share This Page

Welcome to Velocity Reviews!

Welcome to the Velocity Reviews, the place to come for the latest tech news and reviews.

Please join our friendly community by clicking the button below - it only takes a few seconds and is totally free. You'll be able to chat with other enthusiasts and get tech help from other members.
Sign up now!